Thanks Thanks:  43
Likes Likes:  140
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 428
  1. #51
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,139
    Post Thanks / Like
    Again, that happened 5-10 years ago.

  2. #52
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    No mention was made of Jet trainers...


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  3. #53
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    I assume these are the Aero L-159's.... there are quite a number just sitting around hangers since the Czech air force scaled back.

    A step up from the PC-9's certainly. But worth it?

    Edit: I remember someone mentioning an anecdote, possibly on this board, it was a discussion he had with a member of the Air Corps - essentially, the thrust of it was that compared to the fuel costs of the Fouga Magister, a BAe Hawk fuel costs would be astronomical, even leaving aside other routine maintenance....

    I'm guessing it would be a similar story for the 159..
    Last edited by pym; 27th August 2007 at 14:20.

  4. #54
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,726
    Post Thanks / Like
    Read Foxes article..support by Mr, Power.

    Seems like Foxe is on a monthly bonus for writing these articles..a few months he was preaching about death from the skies and the ability of the PC 9 to mount weapons...then there was the Navy's secret weapons tests..now its jets...

    Any guesses on next months feature?
    Time for another break I think......

  5. #55
    6-40509-04014-7 yooklid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Right behind you.....
    Posts
    2,921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Any guesses on next months feature?
    Abbeyshrule.
    Meh.

  6. #56
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by yooklid View Post
    Abbeyshrule.

    SHH!


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  7. #57
    Moderated
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    95
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Did anyone else read Ken Foxe in the Irish Mail on sunday? It seems Aero Vodochody offered us a few Jets....

    They had a guy at one of the Salthill Airshow press releases a few years ago saying that they wanted to produce Aircaft in Ireland and offer them to the IAC, I was present at that. The Czech jet didnt turn up though for the show.

  8. #58
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    They were L-39ZA models that were for an unpaid order if I remember correctly. The L-159 would be a step in the right direction and there are plenty of as new aircraft available. Lets face it though folks, they would only be a step. We have no military radar network and a limited civilian primary network available so if the Russians want to get close they can and we wont see them...unless they're squalking their transponders!!!

  9. #59
    C/S goc132's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    westmeath
    Posts
    939
    Post Thanks / Like
    How long before Baldonnell becomes a commerical Airport.
    Will it ever happen?

  10. #60
    Intelligence Officer The Blue Max's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Finner Air Station
    Posts
    517
    Post Thanks / Like

    Reply to "when will Baldonnel become a civilian airport"

    To be honest it wont ever happen for long time if it ever does. The many rumours that circulaleted from 1999 onwards that the Don would be destined for use by low fair airlines or cargo aviation handlers because of the huge build of industrial units around the Air Base is ill founded.

    Dublin Airport the primary gateway into our state is being developed currently that will have the capactiy to handle 50million passenger and also facitlies our in hand to cater for further cargo handling though increased new taxi ways, more aircraft stands and other ancilliares facilities available it is also the same for airlines with low fare type or charter or trans nationals having access this similiar new facilities.

    With the expansion of Dublin Airport campus with with T2 coming online in spring 2010 along with Pier D this autumn and the extension of the existing terminal one it will allow passenger and airlines experience utiliseing Dublin to be a vast improvment and elimanate the need for second Airport in Dublin. Especially since the plans/project is just about to commence for the second terminal and possibility of third terminal around 2015 if current pax figures contiue at the future projected rate.

    Baldonnel is only military secured aerodrome that is manned and guarded all year round and such provides a very important part of the DF and the capability it can provide currently or in full operational use as a Military Air Base.

    BMax.
    British officer: You're seven minutes late, Mr. Collins.
    Michael Collins: You've kept us waiting 700 years. You can have your seven minutes.

    [As the British flag comes down]

    Michael Collins: So that's what all the bother was about.

  11. #61
    Tim Horgan Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    The location of so much housing in the flightpath effectively rules out any chance of it becoming a commercial airport without severe limitations as to its operating times.


    Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.

  12. #62
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    The location of so much housing in the flightpath effectively rules out any chance of it becoming a commercial airport without severe limitations as to its operating times.
    Have you flown into Dublin Airport recently? There has been massive development under the approach to runway 28, which is the main runway in use.

    Dublin Airport is so big and busy now that having to use it as a passenger has become an ordeal that many people dread.

    It would make a great deal of sense to develop a second airport to the south-west of Dublin, whether it be Baldonnel or elsewhere. But then, when did good sense count for much in these matters...

  13. #63
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like
    Nevertheless, as Dublin Airport gets busier, Ireland's population gorws and Dublin expands outwards like an ugly rash rather than upwards like a city, a second airport will become essential for business commuters and short hops, unless the city wants to lose out to Belfast. So they'd better find some location soon before every remaining greenfield sight becomes a housing estate.

  14. #64
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,058
    Post Thanks / Like

    Czech out this offer!

    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    I assume these are the Aero L-159's.... there are quite a number just sitting around hangers since the Czech air force scaled back.

    A step up from the PC-9's certainly. But worth it?

    Edit: I remember someone mentioning an anecdote, possibly on this board, it was a discussion he had with a member of the Air Corps - essentially, the thrust of it was that compared to the fuel costs of the Fouga Magister, a BAe Hawk fuel costs would be astronomical, even leaving aside other routine maintenance....

    I'm guessing it would be a similar story for the 159..
    Apparently the Czech Air Force are trying to trade in their L-159s to EADS/CASA for some C-295 transport aircraft. Maybe EADS/CASA gave their contacts in Baldonnel a ring to see if they were interested in a bargain? One thing is for sure: they'd be a lot cheaper than the PC-9Ms.


  15. #65
    Lt Colonel
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    Cheaper to purchase, but how much to run?

    I'm highly dubious of the Air Corps getting any expanded combat capability in the next 10 years. I just don't think the money will be provided when the there are major programs needed to replace ships in the naval service & the the LAV's for the Army.

    Not to mention other things

  16. #66
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,815
    Post Thanks / Like

    close air support



    AH-6Js - small, simple, cheap, effective

  17. #67
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    Lads, let me give you an idea of how much the Fouga drank.About a thousand litres in 90 minutes.Two 1020-lb thrust engines, of 1950s technology, which meant that they were about as efficient as a log fire, in today's terms.The engine of the 159 or Hawk will use less than half, fly for longer and probably last for a decade.No comparison in terms of fuel economics, but avionics are grossly expensive...still, those ALCAs could be had for small money and could be shipped to trouble spots, for COIN/recce, in a short time.
    regards
    GttC

  18. #68
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    Listen...that's the sound of Vincent Browne's tears hitting a champagne glass.

    You warmongering monsters, with your evil dreams of orphan killing machines.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  19. #69
    Captain Fireplace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,664
    Post Thanks / Like
    You will never have a quiet world until you knock the patriotism out of the human race

  20. #70
    Commandant Come-quickly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    2,753
    Post Thanks / Like
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGWbR...eature=related

    Surely if one was to spend a substantial chunk of the defence budget on an armed recce/Close support aircraft it would make more sense to get an RW assett that could be based alongside any RW transport assets we have - say for instances based at our BG main location as in Chad and Liberia or that can be pooled at a central RW depot location as in Kosovo.

    A purpose built ARH is going to give a lot more value for money in our current operational spectrum as it can provide recce, escort and if the occasion should arise intimidation and CAS while being locally based.

    Cheap and (relatively) cheerful Mongoose anyone?

    Dimensions:
    Overall Length with Both Rotors Turning
    14.29m
    Height to Top of Rotor
    3.35m
    Main Rotor Diameter
    11.9m
    Fuselage Length
    12.5m
    Maximum Mission Gross Weight
    5,000kg
    Weapons:
    hellfire or TOW 2 Missiles
    8
    70mm Rockets
    76
    81mm Rockets
    38
    20mm Ammunition Rounds
    500
    Air-to-Air (Stinger or Mistral)
    4/8
    Observation and Targeting Sensors
    2nd-generation FLIR (83x mag)
    CCD TV (26x mag)
    Laser range finder and designator
    Automatic target tracker
    Video recorder
    Engines:
    Turboshaft Engines
    2 x LHTEC-T800
    Take-Off Power
    1,335shp each (996kW each)
    Intermediate Power
    1,240shp each (925kW each)
    One Engine Inoperative (OEI) Contingency
    1,404shp (1,045kW)
    Performance:
    Hover-in-Ground Effect
    13,800ft (4,200m)
    Hover-Out-Ground Effect
    10,800ft (3,290m)
    Maximum Cruise Speed
    150kt (278km/h)
    Vertical Rate of Climb
    1,070ft/min (5.4m/sec)
    Maximum Rate of Climb
    2,220ft/min (11.3m/sec)
    Maximum Range on Internal Fuel, No Reserve
    303nm (561km)
    OEI Maximum Rate of Climb
    900ft/min (4.6m/sec)

    From www.armytechnology.com

    Realistically though you would need a force of 8 to be able to deploy four and have two available at any time.
    Big impact on the Defence Budget.
    "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke

  21. #71
    Interested Observer Duffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    116
    Post Thanks / Like
    How would the running costs per hour of an L159 compere to a PC9? And also would eight PC9's cost more or less than eight L159's

  22. #72
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    22,139
    Post Thanks / Like
    If these were purchased would we not still need the pc-9 as a basic trainer?

  23. #73
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    With a PC-9, you have to factor in the costs of a propellor, which is not a factor for a jet.Those props are not cheap and they are easily damaged.Also, there are comparatively few PC-9s about, from a very expensive manufacturer, whereas there are more L-39s/59s/159s about, from a relatively cheaper source and the jets can carry more per wing and can operate on relatively poor airstrips.
    regards
    GttC

  24. #74
    Commandant Jetjock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,751
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    If these were purchased would we not still need the pc-9 as a basic trainer?
    Yes the PC-9's would still be required.The L-159 is a single seater. The Czechs are converting a small number to twin seaters. Lots of airframes in storage. Would be available for relatively small money and not too big a step up from PC-9 for crews, with a massive step up in capability.

    However, as regards the use of the PC-9 as a basic trainer I'm staying on the fence on that one. Can't imagine having had my first solo in something that powerful! Still think a small number of proper basic trainers are required.

  25. #75
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,815
    Post Thanks / Like
    The PC-9s are a mistake: too powerful for the training job - the AC doesn't operate any fast jets - and not tough enough for the CAS role. The €60 million or so that was spent on them could have bought a similar number of basic trainers, together with a similar number of armed light helicopters. (Dedicated attack helicopters are beyond our budget and probably not good value for money anyway.)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •